Dear President Bush,

[OGShocker]

You have lost me for good. (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,300686,00.html)
Those who know me know I have long been a supporter of GW. Those days ended when I read this story. There has to be a way around "Vienna". Find it and I will return to the fold.

[eliminatedsprinter]

It sounds to me the President's hands are tied, if he is bound by the U.S.Constitution and our international commitments. I don't see why his support of the rule of law and the U.S.Constitution would make us support him less, even if it does prevent justice from being served in this case. Our Constitution and our international commitments have come at great cost of blood and treasure over the past 231 years. This tragedy (or travisty) as bad as it is, is still not worth weakining or violating them over, for the cost of that would most likely be much higher still.

[Old Texan]

Being this happened here at home I've been up to date on this from the beginning. This was perhaps the most brutal and senseless murder anyone could ever imagine.
Bush would have done everyone a favor to have just stepped back and let real justice be done with this scum. I really feel he had a choice to not allow poilitics to involve international courts to decide US and state laws. In spite of ES taking a voice of reason, I do not truly believe the President needed to be placed into making a decision or get involved. These were hideous ruthless killers that have been allowed to live far longer than they deserved.
Having seen this case play out I'm far to emotional to see it any other way than a death sentence for this ruthless scum. 2 of the perps have already escaped the death sentence via being to young at the time of the crime, I hope like hell a 3rd won't get lucky.
The whole appeal is very questionable at best and hopefully the Supreme Court will allow Texas to serve the justice this heinous killer deserves.

[Boatcop]

I saw something about this, this afternoon.
I think that the Supremes will look at this as a harmless mistake. They had the chance to raise the fact that the compact was violated at any one of their numerous appeals already conducted. (Isn't that what defense attorneys are for?)
The issue only came to light when Mexico brought it up in the International Court.
This has nothing to do with the brutal rape and murder of 2 young girls. Or even about the scum who did it.
This is only about Mexico trying to dictate to the US Government what we can and cannot do.
Expect to hear from the loony left and their ACLU mouthpieces soon.

[Glamasu]

It sounds to me the President's hands are tied, if he is bound by the U.S.Constitution and our international commitments. I don't see why his support of the rule of law and the U.S.Constitution would make us support him less, even if it does prevent justice from being served in this case. Our Constitution and our international commitments have come at great cost of blood and treasure over the past 231 years. This tragedy (or travisty) as bad as it is, is still not worth weakining or violating them over, for the cost of that would most likely be much higher still.
I wonder if this would be your P.O.V. had this been your daughter?

[Glamasu]

Being this happened here at home I've been up to date on this from the beginning. This was perhaps the most brutal and senseless murder anyone could ever imagine.
Bush would have done everyone a favor to have just stepped back and let real justice be done with this scum. I really feel he had a choice to not allow poilitics to involve international courts to decide US and state laws. In spite of ES taking a voice of reason, I do not truly believe the President needed to be placed into making a decision or get involved. These were hideous ruthless killers that have been allowed to live far longer than they deserved.
Having seen this case play out I'm far to emotional to see it any other way than a death sentence for this ruthless scum. 2 of the perps have already escaped the death sentence via being to young at the time of the crime, I hope like hell a 3rd won't get lucky.
The whole appeal is very questionable at best and hopefully the Supreme Court will allow Texas to serve the justice this heinous killer deserves.
Your absolutly right about this.....Should never had made it this far.
I still don't understand why they(death row) get sit around for these amounts of time....Once the gavel hits the block they should be sent the chair,chamber,firing squad, ......My house....what ever but get it done!!!Especialy when they admit as the case is here.

[Glamasu]

I saw something about this, this afternoon.
I think that the Supremes will look at this as a harmless mistake. They had the chance to raise the fact that the compact was violated at any one of their numerous appeals already conducted. (Isn't that what defense attorneys are for?)
The issue only came to light when Mexico brought it up in the International Court.
This has nothing to do with the brutal rape and murder of 2 young girls. Or even about the scum who did it.
This is only about Mexico trying to dictate to the US Government what we can and cannot do.
Expect to hear from the loony left and their ACLU mouthpieces soon.
Yep,
ACLU and all the "latino" based maggots will be all over this

[never_fast_enuf]

This one is news to me. At first glance, it really makes me shake my head in amazement. For me, red flags are popping up all over the place and I am not going to form an opinion on this until I have had a chance to understand it all.
I feel very bad for the parents and what they have had to endure for the last 12 years.
I can say that I do not think international law should trump our state laws. To me, THAT is very wrong.

[Old Texan]

This one is news to me. At first glance, it really makes me shake my head in amazement. For me, red flags are popping up all over the place and I am not going to form an opinion on this until I have had a chance to understand it all.
I feel very bad for the parents and what they have had to endure for the last 12 years.
I can say that I do not think international law should trump our state laws. To me, THAT is very wrong.
It boils down to court appointed appeals lawyers searching for loopholes.
The families have had to endure rehashing this horrible murder 4 times since the original guilty verdicts were handed down.
2 yound girls running late took a shortcut through a public park where they encountered drug crazed thugs doing a club initiation. The girls were run down and taken captive, then were brutally raped, beaten, sodomized, and left mutilated.
There should be no petty loophole allowed. In my opinion these animals lost all rights the moment they destroyed two innocent lives.

[YeLLowBoaT]

Its not like they beat the confession out of him. Frankly I think as soon as he confessed he should have been shot right then and there.

[OKIE-JET]

Bush has found his way around other things that looked to be impenatrable, IF he REALLY cares he better find a way around this. Or just free the man, and turn it into the sequell of "A Time To Kill".:devil:

[Schiada76]

At least Ultra isn't afraid to show his true colors. He thinks "international law" should trump our constitution. A true leftist.
liberals are SCUM

[Schiada76]

Bush has found his way around other things that looked to be impenatrable, IF he REALLY cares he better find a way around this. Or just free the man, and turn it into the sequell of "A Time To Kill".:devil:
The fact is Bush did not have to do anything at all regarding this case. Legally they gave up their rights to speak to their embassy when their attorneys fckd up. The messicans sued the US in the Hague and won but it doesn't mean jack shit. They have zero authority and Bush is just sucking on messicos tit again.:mad: :mad:

[Schiada76]

A better question to ask here is don't you all think that 54 messican nationals being on death row in this country is a little high?:confused:

[Schiada76]

WTF does this have to do with our Constitution. This is all about TX State law and international law.
Don't you think before you write?
Oh fer fuks sake, what does the Constitution have to do with state law????:rolleyes: YOU REALLY ARE A PIECE OF WORK.
The Supreme Court is hearing this to determine if Federal law can trump state law in this case. The States have no fcking agreement with the international court.
Fcking liberal imbecile:rolleyes:

[Schiada76]

You do know that death penalty decisions are based on STATE LAW don't you??
I didn't think so.
"Think before you write". Thats hysterical coming from you.:rolleyes: :D :D

[Schiada76]

Thanks for the education. :2purples: Trump this Schiada
That was my point Williad
That wasn't your point you lying pinhead.
State law has nothing to do with international law you nitwit!
This is now about the federal government sticking it's nose where it doesn't belong in STATE LAW because Bush is sucking messicos tit!
You know jack chit about the Constitution.

[Schiada76]

WTF does this have to do with our Constitution. This is all about TX State law and international law.
Don't you think before you write?
This right here is a flat out STUPID statement.
liberals are all SCUM

[Old Texan]

The below link is the story of this horrible event. The appeals were generated by court appointed defense attornies. After reviewing this or living in the city where it happened and seeing the heartbreak and anguish done to families and communities, one should come to realize this is a bad appeal and complete injustice.
In the interest of civility I will reserve my opinion of someone wanting to argue constitutional law and hope they are never close to a tragedy like this.
http://www.murdervictims.com/Voices/jeneliz.html

[Schiada76]

OT, This case alone is reason enough to mine the border.
It sound like you might have been close to one of the families of those young girls. I truely hope not, I get the shakes when ever I read or hear what those animals did to those children.:(

[Old Texan]

OT, This case alone is reason enough to mine the border.
It sound like you might have been close to one of the families of those young girls. I truely hope not, I get the shakes when ever I read or hear what those animals did to those children.:(
It's been in the news here since the beginning. I have a friend who knows the Ertman's and he says it's just destroyed their lives. Everytime they get to the point of some type of closure, something like this ridiculous appeal pops up and they are forced to relive the whole thing over again.
The graphic testimony in trial of what these swine did to these poor girls was simply devestating. I frankly don't know if I could have taken it if it had been one of my children.
This is definitely a pure and simple case of no concern for the victim's rights

[Schiada76]

It's got nothing to do with Bush's, as you so elegantly put it, sucking messicos tit, it's about whether or not international law supersedes TX law. The POS was convicted and sentenced to daleth under the laws of the State of Texas. There maybe points of Texas law, that maybe be superseded by international law.
I'm surprised that your wife is allowing you to discuss politics again or are we sneaking again? :confused: Go crawl back in your little hateful hole
You are complete imbecile, dumber than the stump in my backyard.
This has NOTHING to do with with whether or not international law supersedes state law you stupid scum bag!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It's about whether or not the FEDERAL government can intersede on behalf of the filthy mexicans that murder people in this country. The FEDERAL government deals with the international court not the State govt. fer god's sake get yer head out of your ass!
BUSH over stepped the federal govt's authority in this case to appese the messican govt! He didn't have to do jack shit here!
He is going to lose and he's an embarrassment to this country. Fer CHRISTS sake you have the worst BDS I've seen and you aren't pissed at him over this BECAUSE YOU SUPPORT THE INERNATIONAL COURT over our constitution. Traitor!!!!!!:mad:

[eliminatedsprinter]

I wonder if this would be your P.O.V. had this been your daughter?
Absolutly!!!!!! I would want him released into Mexico, so I could go down there, hunt him down, and kill him in my own way!!!! The last place on earth I would want that monster, is sitting in U.S. prison watching HBO, where I coudn't get at him......

[eliminatedsprinter]

One point that is being missed here is the nature of the Constitutional issue. The U.S. Constitution grants the Executive branch the power to negotiate international treaties and the Congress the power to approve those treaties, that the States are then bound to follow. It is not a matter of one type of law trumping another. The States are Constitutionally required to honor the international agreements that are negotated by the executive branch and apporved by Congress. It comes with belonging to a Federal Republic..
At least one of the major legal issues here seems to be the question of whether simply not notifying this turd he had the right to seek the help of his nations' counsulate is denying him that right. I believe this is something the U.S. federal courts will have to decide. If the courts rule like the Supreme court did in Maranda??????Then everyones hands may be tied.

[billygull]

It sounds to me the President's hands are tied, if he is bound by the U.S.Constitution and our international commitments. I don't see why his support of the rule of law and the U.S.Constitution would make us support him less, even if it does prevent justice from being served in this case. Our Constitution and our international commitments have come at great cost of blood and treasure over the past 231 years. This tragedy (or travisty) as bad as it is, is still not worth weakining or violating them over, for the cost of that would most likely be much higher still.
Okay, since when has the U.S. Constitution and international commitments mattered to Bush???? :confused:
~BillyRay~
boat insurance (http://www.unitedmarine.net/boat.asp)

[Schiada76]

One point that is being missed here is the nature of the Constitutional issue. The U.S. Constitution grants the Executive branch the power to negotiate international treaties and the Congress the power to approve those treaties, that the States are then bound to follow. It is not a matter of one type of law trumping another. The States are Constitutionally required to honor the international agreements that are negotated by the executive branch and apporved by Congress. It comes with belonging to a Federal Republic..
At least one of the major legal issues here seems to be the question of whether simply not notifying this turd he had the right to seek the help of his nations' counsulate is denying him that right. I believe this is something the U.S. federal courts will have to decide. If the courts rule like the Supreme court did in Maranda??????Then everyones hands may be tied.
The Supremes are hearing this just to determine if the Feds,AKA Bush the Mex, can interfere with a States right, which has already been tested, because a foreign govt. has sued the federal govt. in a foreign court.
If the Supremes rule in favor of mssico watch the shit hit the fan.
Filthy liberals like u26 will celebrate however.

[Moneypitt]

If he was found hanging in his cell I guess the entire deal would be moot.....Give him some rope, whether he wants it or not................MP

[eliminatedsprinter]

Filthy liberal turds like u26 will clebrate however.
The above is uncalled for.
Besides
States have absolutly no rights. States have powers and authorities granted them by the Constitution and the people. Only individual human beings have rights and they are endowed upon us by our creator (whether it be God or Nature). The idea that States or any other government entity has rights is the start of a mindset that has allowed authoritarians and collectivists to deny rights to individuals throughout history.

[Schiada76]

The above is uncalled for.
Besides
States have absolutly no rights. States have powers and authorities granted them by the Constitution and the people. Only individual human beings have rights and they are endowed upon us by our creator (whether it be God or Nature). The idea that States or any other government entity has rights is the start of a mindset that has allowed authoritarians and collectivists to deny rights to individuals throughout history.
Boy, you sure got me there.:rolleyes:
States' rights refers to the idea, in U.S. politics and constitutional law, that U.S. states possess certain rights and political powers in relation to the federal government. A commonly cited source for states' rights is the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights. The states' rights concept is usually used to defend a state law that the federal government seeks to override, or to oppose a perceived violation by the federal government of the bounds of federal authority.

[eliminatedsprinter]

Okay, since when has the U.S. Constitution and international commitments mattered to Bush???? :confused:
~BillyRay~
boat insurance (http://www.unitedmarine.net/boat.asp)
Both have mattered a lot to President Bush and every other President in the history of the United States of America. The only differances between any of them have been in the matter of degree and the emphisis they give to the various parts and interpritations etc...
You may not like this particular President, but you are damn lucky to have him. Just like I am lucky we had Carter or any of my other least favorite Presidents. The fact is, that many (if not most) of the nations in the world are still waiting to get a leader that is as good as the worst we have ever had. All of our Presidents have respected the limits placed upon them by our Constitution and international commitments to a degree that is unprecidented in human history. That is why we have become the worlds only superpower, the greatest economic power ever, and the largest free and prosperous nation the world has ever seen.

[Rexone]

Filthy liberals like u26 will celebrate however.
Back off on the name calling please.

[Schiada76]

Back off on the name calling please.
Yes Sir!:D
My apologies.

[Schiada76]

Both have mattered a lot to President Bush and every other President in the history of the United States of America. The only differances between any of them have been in the matter of degree and the emphisis they give to the various parts and interpritations etc...
You may not like this particular President, but you are damn lucky to have him. Just like I am lucky we had Carter or any of my other least favorite Presidents. The fact is, that many (if not most) of the nations in the world are still waiting to get a leader that is as good as the worst we have ever had. All of our Presidents have respected the limits placed upon them by our Constitution and international commitments to a degree that is unprecidented in human history. That is why we have become the worlds only superpower, the greatest economic power ever, and the largest free and prosperous nation the world has ever seen.
It is a constant struggle to keep it that way, there are many among us who wish these facts were not the case.:(

[eliminatedsprinter]

Boy, you sure got me there.:rolleyes:
States' rights refers to the idea, in U.S. politics and constitutional law, that U.S. states possess certain rights and political powers in relation to the federal government. A commonly cited source for states' rights is the Tenth Amendment to the Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights. The states' rights concept is usually used to defend a state law that the federal government seeks to override, or to oppose a perceived violation by the federal government of the bounds of federal authority.
We seem to be debating semantics here. I absolutly agree that the federal government has far too often tread upon the "POWERS" that the 10th Amendment grants to the states. However, the 1Oth Amendment uses the word "POWERS" not "RIGHTS" for the very reason I stated in my above post. "Rights" are something that are only granted to us (individuals) by our creator. The Bill of Rights mearly acknowledges those rights. It does not grant them to us. The Constitution and the Bill of Rights does however, grant the Federal and State governments their powers.
In short, "POWERS" are granted to the states and federal government, by the people and our representitives and can be changed. "RIGHTS" on the other hand, are granted to us by our creator and therefore should be much harder to change or take away. This may seem like a trivial distinction and you can :rolleyes: all you want, but this concept is a key part of the foundation of individual liberties that this nation was founded upon.

[OGShocker]

Thanks for the education. :2purples: Trump this Schiada
That was my point Williad
OK, school is in session.
The STATE convicted him and gave him the death penalty. The WHITE HOUSE (that would be Federal) sued to STOP the STATES decision based on a tready we signed in Vienna (INTERNATION). Now the Supreme Court (FEDERAL) is reviewing the case.
Please engage your brain prior to posting in my threads.

[ULTRA26 # 1]

OK, school is in session.
The STATE convicted him and gave him the death penalty. The WHITE HOUSE (that would be Federal) sued to STOP the STATES decision based on a tready we signed in Vienna (INTERNATION). Now the Supreme Court (FEDERAL) is reviewing the case.
Please engage your brain prior to posting in my threads.
I apologize for the brainless comments. Everything has been deleted except for where I was quoted
jm

[eliminatedsprinter]

OK, school is in session.
The STATE convicted him and gave him the death penalty. The WHITE HOUSE (that would be Federal) sued to STOP the STATES decision based on a tready we signed in Vienna (INTERNATION). Now the Supreme Court (FEDERAL) is reviewing the case.
Please engage your brain prior to posting in my threads.
It is the responsibility of the federal government to make sure the states honor the international agreements it makes. I just wish the state prosecutors were thurough enough to tell this piece of scum, that he had the right to contact his consulate for help. Then this would not be happeing. I'll bet President Bush wishes this more than any of us, because he is the one who is most put in a bind by all of this.This case is horrible and unfortunatly it may become another one in which prosecutorial incompetence (in this case the state's) allows a shi#bag to get off. And once again, Bush gets the blame..........